Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 14 to 26 of 26

Thread: 12 v 4 regarding side counting in the earlier rounds

  1. #14


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeeBabar View Post
    Wow! This much discussion on this hand....how in the world am I winning without all these calculations!!!
    There are hand signals for hit, split, stand and surrender, haven't seen one for hold on, doing some math.

  2. #15


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    I'm taking a look at page 83 of Griffin's book right now.
    With no information available, standing is 0.65% better than hitting.

    Let's say

    Round 1 -
    me: T4 (0)
    player2: A43 (2)
    player3: A52 (1)
    dealer: 6TT (-1)
    RC: 2
    Other notes: 2 aces exposed, 1 deuce exposed, 11 cards exposed

    Round 2 -
    me: T2 (-1)
    player2: 36 (2)
    player3: T4 (0)
    dealer: 2 (0)
    RC: 2 + 1 == 3
    Other notes: 2 aces exposed, 4 deuces exposed, 19 cards exposed

    Using hiopt1,
    RC is 3,
    TC is ~1.8
    There are also 2 aces exposed, 4 deuces exposed, and no middle cards at all exposed.

    The exact math in the example above comes out to be that standing is 0.23% better than hitting when using Griffin's numbers.

    My question is how do I make strategic adjustments at game speed using hiopt1? The breakeven point at RC 3 is no longer 0.65%. How do I get an estimate of what it should be and translate that into index plays?

    Can I just treat the RC as percentages (I know the answer is no, but I think it is close)? So at a RC of 3, the breakeven point is 3.65. In the example above, there is a surplus of 4.5 middle cards, the RC estimate becomes -0.85.

    Also my goal is to figure out
    a) what are some other round 2 plays where strategic adjustments matter a lot where side tracking 7s-9s matter,
    b) if the sum of (frequency of occurrence) x (dollars made) in everyone of those plays is enough to make this worth analyzing,
    c) a shortcut to take for those plays (eg, +-1 or +-2 for surplus or deficit of a middle card)

    I feel like the main argument would be
    a) this is complicated and thus I'll be prone to making errors,
    b) the frequency of occurrence probably occurs way more at negative counts and thus adds little when it matters (I'm making a guess on this one),
    c) bet spread trumps strategic adjustments (I'm making another guess here, but I have a feeling it still matters esp if bet spread is at 1-3 or 1-4).

    I don't side count 7s-9s, but it's not hard to notice whether or not there is a surplus or deficit after just 1 round on a crowded table, so I think there is still a lot to be gained from this. Also I want to reduce my spread as I believe it increases longevity. By doing so, I think I need to improve my play.

    Anyways, I think the main thing I learned about this exact play is deficits of middle cards matter a lot more than surpluses. If the count is negative, but a bunch of 7s, 8s, and 9s are exposed then I should be standing since they act like low cards.
    Last edited by FishBear; 08-20-2017 at 03:35 PM.

  3. #16


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeeBabar View Post
    Wow! This much discussion on this hand....how in the world am I winning without all these calculations!!!
    I'm a recreational player. I used hi-lo with huge bet spreads for years w/o a care in the world how the math works. I want to advance my game now.

    I think analyzing 1 hand at a time is very important. In the end, my goal is to group similar hands together so I use certain heuristics for that group of hands.

    Right now I'm trying to figure out if it is worth making strategic adjustments based on 7s-9s exposed on round 2.

    If the EV gains from this is in the pennies then I'll ditch it.
    If the EV gains is way more than pennies (I believe so along with lower stdev) then I want to learn.

  4. #17


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeeBabar View Post
    Wow! This much discussion on this hand....how in the world am I winning without all these calculations!!!
    And, so many posts.

  5. #18


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    It also occurred to me that this might benefit in situations where you start off the top of the shoe with more than a 1 unit wager.

    Off the top of the deck, I think I'm losing somewhere along the line of 0.5 to 0.8% of my wager with basic strategy based on the house edge.

    If I can reduce this by a good amount with better PE, then I'm okay with starting the top of a DD with a bigger bet as cover. I guess the question is how many of those plays exist and will it reduce the house edge by enough to make it worth analyzing?

  6. #19
    Banned or Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Eastern U S A
    Posts
    6,830


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    NOTE: Don S used Hi-Opt I for his calculation.
    I applaud that. It is perfect for this purpose.

    Hi-Opt I was actually created as a platform for
    Side-Counting ALL of the excluded ranks, but
    the indices were being sold to purchasers of ~
    "The World's Greatest ..."

    Dr. Gordon's counted ranks used the deuce,
    instead of the
    trey. That created a slight dip
    in B.C. but smartly improved the P.E. Dr.
    Gordon's indices for the Gordon
    Count.

    Hi-Opt I is a poor choice for shoe games and a
    poor choice overall without several Side Counts.
    Last edited by ZenMaster_Flash; 08-21-2017 at 05:29 AM.

  7. #20


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    It's scratching your balls. You can't give any of those 4 hand signals while your scratching your balls. Hopefully you get the idea of how to buy time when controlling the table.
    Of course you can. It's called - multi tasking.

  8. #21


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    Not if you use your signaling hand to scratch your balls. You can also get in there with both hands. Remember the purpose is to buy time to think not efficiently use your hands. You just need to keep your signaling hand busy doing something else. If its a double, split, insurance or surrender decision you can ask the dealer to count your chip stack. You can buy in for more chips or color up. You can take a drink of your beverage. You can petition the other players for decision advice. You can ask why. I always figure if a decision is so close you need more time there isn't much EV difference in the decision anyway.
    Not withstanding the methodology as to how, simply say, let me think for a second while I scratch my balls. You should know that. There's a course for professional ball scratching.

  9. #22


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    Don't worry about it. I used to play baseball. I learned to spit and scratch my balls at the same time. Now that is multitasking. But the dealer doesn't appreciate being spat on.

    I'm pleased to learn that you are proficient in this most sacred art.

  10. #23


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by FishBear View Post
    I'm taking a look at page 83 of Griffin's book right now.
    With no information available, standing is 0.65% better than hitting.

    Let's say

    Round 1 -
    me: T4 (0)
    player2: A43 (2)
    player3: A52 (1)
    dealer: 6TT (-1)
    RC: 2
    Other notes: 2 aces exposed, 1 deuce exposed, 11 cards exposed

    Round 2 -
    me: T2 (-1)
    player2: 36 (2)
    player3: T4 (0)
    dealer: 2 (0)
    RC: 2 + 1 == 3
    Other notes: 2 aces exposed, 4 deuces exposed, 19 cards exposed

    Using hiopt1,
    RC is 3,
    TC is ~1.8
    There are also 2 aces exposed, 4 deuces exposed, and no middle cards at all exposed.

    The exact math in the example above comes out to be that standing is 0.23% better than hitting when using Griffin's numbers.

    My question is how do I make strategic adjustments at game speed using hiopt1? The breakeven point at RC 3 is no longer 0.65%. How do I get an estimate of what it should be and translate that into index plays?

    Can I just treat the RC as percentages (I know the answer is no, but I think it is close)? So at a RC of 3, the breakeven point is 3.65. In the example above, there is a surplus of 4.5 middle cards, the RC estimate becomes -0.85.

    Also my goal is to figure out
    a) what are some other round 2 plays where strategic adjustments matter a lot where side tracking 7s-9s matter,
    b) if the sum of (frequency of occurrence) x (dollars made) in everyone of those plays is enough to make this worth analyzing,
    c) a shortcut to take for those plays (eg, +-1 or +-2 for surplus or deficit of a middle card)

    I feel like the main argument would be
    a) this is complicated and thus I'll be prone to making errors,
    b) the frequency of occurrence probably occurs way more at negative counts and thus adds little when it matters (I'm making a guess on this one),
    c) bet spread trumps strategic adjustments (I'm making another guess here, but I have a feeling it still matters esp if bet spread is at 1-3 or 1-4).

    I don't side count 7s-9s, but it's not hard to notice whether or not there is a surplus or deficit after just 1 round on a crowded table, so I think there is still a lot to be gained from this. Also I want to reduce my spread as I believe it increases longevity. By doing so, I think I need to improve my play.

    Anyways, I think the main thing I learned about this exact play is deficits of middle cards matter a lot more than surpluses. If the count is negative, but a bunch of 7s, 8s, and 9s are exposed then I should be standing since they act like low cards.
    Well the good news is, is ho1 doesnt already count these into the main count..The best hand for YOUR count s 15 vs. 7,8,9,X,A but ALL your 16s will be hurt from counting the sixes at +1..As ZMF pointed out, hi opt1 was more than likely designed to keep a separate side-count of the 7,8,9s individually..However that is not to say, you couldnt get some gain from counting them as a subgroup as well..Insurance decisions wll be your biggest gain here from side-countng them in a sub-group, followed by 15, 16 vs dealers 7,8, because these will bust your hand of 15 and 16 and give the deal 14, 15 and 16(17) on the 7,8 up card respectively..Addtonally there will be a nice gain from H12 against the dealers bust-card and likely some gain from a few H13s contingent of dealers up-card..

    The thing is, with any Multi-parameter system, some study and analysis is required to determine which hands a surplus or deficit of the side-counted card(or cards) helps or hurts particular hands and by how much, and then appled accordingly...For example, in your example of H12 with almost 1/2 deck deal out you should had an Avg. estimate of about 5 mddle cards(7,8,9) which in your case there was none..So the Avg. weight of these iin respect to your Level 1 count you should adjust your RC -1 for every one your short, while these should be to ADD+2(estimating here) for 16v7..Of course you need good deck estimation skills as well since your keeping track of 3 cards per 1/4 deck(4.33 per card)...
    Last edited by Jack Jackson; 08-21-2017 at 11:13 AM.
    http://bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi

  11. #24


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Three View Post
    It's scratching your balls. You can't give any of those 4 hand signals while your scratching your balls. Hopefully you get the idea of how to buy time when controlling the table.
    Thank you for the new hand signal. I must do a lot of BJ math.

  12. #25


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by moses View Post
    Whew! A big load off my mind this morning. Hey wait a minute. I thought T3 was a lady. Whoa, whoa, whoa, he's a lady. Tom Jones
    Just did a quick you tube search on Cricodile Dundee scratching balls, and came up with link below.

    https://youtu.be/n6fgPX3NjyA

  13. #26


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Forgot that great scene.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Side Counting 7's
    By refinery in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 07-17-2017, 09:10 AM
  2. Red Seven: Side Counting Aces
    By BlackjackFeign in forum General Blackjack Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-28-2016, 02:38 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.